Community

I have a lot of trouble with the forum. Many times a msg will not
post as it sits in a cycle waiting for the nntp server to get the
message or for it to be announced.
IMO there are much better forum software out there that would
make it easier to communicate about D than the current method.
http://www.mybb.com/ is free, pretty good, and relatively easy to
setup.
The ability to edit a post makes life much easier too!

On 05-12-2012 19:28, js.mdnq wrote:
> I have a lot of trouble with the forum. Many times a msg will not post
> as it sits in a cycle waiting for the nntp server to get the message or
> for it to be announced.
>
> IMO there are much better forum software out there that would make it
> easier to communicate about D than the current method.
>
> http://www.mybb.com/ is free, pretty good, and relatively easy to setup.
>
> The ability to edit a post makes life much easier too!
>
Most people here don't like these bulletin board forums because they
don't get threading right at all.
--
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex@lycus.org
http://lycus.org

On Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 18:28:04 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:
> I have a lot of trouble with the forum. Many times a msg will
> not post as it sits in a cycle waiting for the nntp server to
> get the message or for it to be announced.
>
> IMO there are much better forum software out there that would
> make it easier to communicate about D than the current method.
>
> http://www.mybb.com/ is free, pretty good, and relatively easy
> to setup.
>
> The ability to edit a post makes life much easier too!
I agree, it is very primitive compared to current standards, and
the existing service is terrible in terms of it crashing all the
time and breaking up threads, etc.
--rt

On 12/6/2012 7:37 AM, Rob T wrote:
> I agree, it is very primitive compared to current standards, and the
> existing service is terrible in terms of it crashing all the time and
> breaking up threads, etc.
Crashing all the time? Will not post? I use this all day every day and
do not see these issues.
Sometimes people who use the mailing list interface see thread breakage,
and that is a problem.
If you want a more web-centric interface, use forum.dlang.org.
BTW, most "modern" forum software sux because:
1. No threaded view
2. No indication of which posts you have read and which you have not
3. 90% of the screen real estate is wasted with avatars, blank space,
stupid signature blocks, cute graphics, window dressing, advertisements,
etc., meaning you have to do lots of scrolling and in general making it
hard on small screen users. Newsreaders give you just the beef, ma'am,
and no chaff.
4. NNTP is very light on bandwidth, making it ideal when you're on the
go using mifi, at a conference with a very slow connection, paying by
the byte of data, etc.

One thing that I think it's confused sometimes is the "thread
split", like happened with this thread (Note: I access via:
forum.dlang.org), overall I like this forum.
On Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 18:28:04 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:
> I have a lot of trouble with the forum. Many times a msg will
> not post as it sits in a cycle waiting for the nntp server to
> get the message or for it to be announced.
>
> IMO there are much better forum software out there that would
> make it easier to communicate about D than the current method.
>
> http://www.mybb.com/ is free, pretty good, and relatively easy
> to setup.
>
> The ability to edit a post makes life much easier too!

On 05-12-2012 21:37, Rob T wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 18:28:04 UTC, js.mdnq wrote:
>> I have a lot of trouble with the forum. Many times a msg will not post
>> as it sits in a cycle waiting for the nntp server to get the message
>> or for it to be announced.
>>
>> IMO there are much better forum software out there that would make it
>> easier to communicate about D than the current method.
>>
>> http://www.mybb.com/ is free, pretty good, and relatively easy to setup.
>>
>> The ability to edit a post makes life much easier too!
>
> I agree, it is very primitive compared to current standards, and the
> existing service is terrible in terms of it crashing all the time and
> breaking up threads, etc.
>
> --rt
The latter is caused by bad(ly configured) NNTP clients, not the server.
--
Alex Rønne Petersen
alex@lycus.org
http://lycus.org

On 12/6/2012 8:50 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> The latter is caused by bad(ly configured) NNTP clients, not the server.
That brings up another advantage of NNTP servers. It is very old
technology, meaning the bugs have been worked out of it long ago. There
is no constant issue of upgrading to the latest version to fix some
obscure bugs, etc. Just turn it on and it works.
And, lastly, there's a wonderful effect of NNTP not being where the
"cool guys" are. The spammers overlook us! Sure, we get a drive-by
slamming from a spammer maybe once a month, but by and large NNTP flies
under the radar these days.

On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 09:14:54AM +1100, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/6/2012 8:50 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> >The latter is caused by bad(ly configured) NNTP clients, not the
> >server.
>
> That brings up another advantage of NNTP servers. It is very old
> technology, meaning the bugs have been worked out of it long ago.
> There is no constant issue of upgrading to the latest version to fix
> some obscure bugs, etc. Just turn it on and it works.
>
> And, lastly, there's a wonderful effect of NNTP not being where the
> "cool guys" are. The spammers overlook us! Sure, we get a drive-by
> slamming from a spammer maybe once a month, but by and large NNTP
> flies under the radar these days.
Plus, NNTP being a public protocol rather than a specific implementation
of a specific forum software, people can use their own NNTP reader,
configured to their tastes, to read posts without having to subscribe to
Yet Another 101th forum with Yet Another Poorly-Chosen Login/Password.
<!Insert off-topic rant about how people seem to be obsessed with
specific software that require specific versions of a specific browser
rather than generic protocols that allow much better interoperability,
automation, scripting, search engine indexing, etc., etc.>
T
--
Too many people have open minds but closed eyes.

On Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 22:14:57 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
> On 12/6/2012 8:50 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
>> The latter is caused by bad(ly configured) NNTP clients, not
>> the server.
>
> That brings up another advantage of NNTP servers. It is very
> old technology, meaning the bugs have been worked out of it
> long ago. There is no constant issue of upgrading to the latest
> version to fix some obscure bugs, etc. Just turn it on and it
> works.
>
> And, lastly, there's a wonderful effect of NNTP not being where
> the "cool guys" are. The spammers overlook us! Sure, we get a
> drive-by slamming from a spammer maybe once a month, but by and
> large NNTP flies under the radar these days.
Hehe, it's cause no one uses it! if you check out most groups
they are full of spam ;/ Only good spam filters can control it to
any degree. With a BB, you require people to register which will
stop 95% of spam. The other 5% could be fixed by asking more
complex questions, stop posting of suspected spammers. Do not
allow new users to post more than 1 post an hour. Allow certain
people(not necessarily moderators) to kill spammers. Block IP's
from registering more than once a month or so, etc...
There are many potential ways to reduce spam to near zero. Most
BB's I've used have near zero spam without any complex spam
protection mechanisms(as far as I know).
BB's have the ability to edit, delete, and move posts. Allow easy
image insertion, private messaging, sticky threads, etc..
Also, the most popular BB's are pretty well tested because they
are more widely used than nntp. So while it is true they are
newer and more sophisticated they also are actively supported.
IMO, the only downside is supporting legacy users who refuse to
make the transition. I think they are just being hard headed
though...

Am 05.12.2012 23:40, schrieb js.mdnq:
> On Wednesday, 5 December 2012 at 22:14:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 12/6/2012 8:50 AM, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> ...
>
> IMO, the only downside is supporting legacy users who refuse to make the
> transition. I think they are just being hard headed though...
I hate web forums with passion, they all suck compared to the browsing
experience most NNTP clients offer.
I can browse threads just with keyboard navigation, follow discussion
threads, mark/unmark all I have read, save discussions for posterity,
all with a standards compliant network protocol free of walled garden
data servers.
As for spam, that is what moderation is for, if ever needed.
I am a firm believer that users of web forums can only find them better
than Usenet, because they haven't experienced Usenet in its golden days.
--
Paulo